The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr B complained about the conduct of the Council during an initial child protection investigation and conference. He also complained the Council allowed a vulnerable person to live at his property for three months. There is no evidence the Council acted with fault which caused Mr B injustice.
The complaint
Mr B complains: About the conduct of the Council during the initial child protection investigation which he states was unnecessary and overly intrusive.
The chair of the child protection review conference admitted that mistakes had been made.
A social worker alleged that he was abusive towards his ex-wife.
The Council allowed his son’s girlfriend, a vulnerable child, to live in his home for three months in 2023.
Mr B says these faults have caused himself and his children psychological trauma and affected his ability to live a happy and peaceful family life. Mr B would like the council to admit fault, retrain its staff and compensate him for loss of earnings and damage to his career.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended) We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide: there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as the National Health Service (NHS). (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)
What I have and have not investigated I have not investigated Mr B’s complaint a social worker alleged he was abusive towards his ex-wife. This is because the Ombudsman cannot investigate whether social workers are meeting their professional standards of conduct. Complaints of this nature should be referred to the social workers’ professional body, Social Work England.
How I considered this complaint
I discussed the complaint with Mr B and considered the evidence he provided.
I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law, guidance and policy.
Both parties had an opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.
What I found
Legal and Administrative Background Section 47 investigations and Child Protection Conferences Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47) Under section 47 of the Children Act 1989, where a council has reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm, it has a duty to make such enquiries as it considers necessary to decide whether to take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. Such enquiries should be initiated where there are concerns about abuse or neglect.
Councils should act decisively to protect children from abuse and neglect including starting care proceedings where existing interventions are insufficient.
Anyone who has concerns about a child’s welfare should make a referral to children’s social care and should do so immediately if there is a concern that the child is suffering significant harm or is likely to do so.
The council should make initial enquiries of agencies involved with the child and family, for example, health visitor, GP, schools and nurseries. The information gathering at this stage enables the council to assess the nature and level of any harm the child may be facing. The assessment may result in: no further action; a decision to carry out a more detailed assessment of the child’s needs; or a decision to convene a strategy meeting.
If the information gathered under section 47 supports concerns and the child may remain at risk of significant harm the social worker will arrange an initial child protection conference (ICPC). The ICPC decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This might include making the child a ‘child in need’ (CiN) and implementing a safety plan.
If, following a referral and an assessment by a social worker, a multi-agency strategy meeting decides the concerns are substantiated and the child is likely to suffer significant harm, the council convenes a Child Protection Conference.
The Child Protection Conference decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include a recommendation that the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan.
After the Initial Child Protection Conference, there will be one or more Review Child Protection Conferences to consider progress on action taken to safeguard the child and whether the Child Protection Plan should be maintained, amended, or discontinued.
Review Child Protection Conferences should be held within three months of the initial conference, and thereafter at maximum intervals of six months.
The Child Protection Conference is a multi-agency body and is not in itself a body in the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.
The Child Protection Conference plays an advisory role. But the final decision, for example whether to place a child on a Child Protection Plan or to discontinue a Plan, is the responsibility of the council. We would generally consider it appropriate for a council to follow the recommendations of the Child Protection Conference unless there was good reason not to.
Duty to Provide Accommodation Councils have a duty to provide accommodation for any child in need in their area who appears to them to need accommodation because: there is no-one who has parental responsibility for the child; the child is lost or abandoned; or the person who has been caring for the child is prevented, whether permanently or temporarily and for whatever reason, from providing suitable accommodation or care.
The council may not provide accommodation in these circumstances if the person who has parental responsibility objects. It can either provide the accommodation or arrange for accommodation to be provided. A child accommodated in this way is a ‘Looked After Child’ (LAC). (Children Act 1989, section 20)
What happened This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
Section 47 Investigation and Child Protection Conference In 2019 allegations of abuse were made against Mr B. A multi-agency investigation into these allegations took place but the allegations were not proven. The Council placed the family on a Child in Need Plan. The allegations resurfaced in the spring of 2022 and the health team shared information from 2019 which it had not shared during the 2019 investigation. In 2022 the Council completed a strategy discussion and progressed to a section 47 investigation.
The Council completed the section 47 investigation, which included gathering information from multiple agencies involved with the family and discussions with the family. The Council decided it needed to complete further work to identify any risks to the children and ensure a clear plan was in place to support the family and ensure their safety. Due to information provided by health professionals in 2022, the council had reasonable cause to suspect Mr B’s children may suffer harm.
On conclusion of the 2022 section 47 investigation an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC) took place in the summer of 2022.
During the Initial Child Protection Conference several professionals provided advice. All professionals present agreed the risks met the threshold for a child protection plan. The professionals did not agree the abuse category under which the plan should be completed. The chair of the meeting decided the category for the child protection plan based on feedback from the professionals present.
Following the initial child protection conference, the Council continued to work with other agencies to identify any risks to the children. This included, but was not limited to, CAMHS referrals for the children, continuing support from a social worker, further investigations within children’s services, and a behaviour assessment of Mr B. The behaviour assessment did not provide a definite outcome on the lived experiences of the children.
A Review Child Protection Conference took place in early 2023. At this conference professionals agreed there was no evidence to suggest the children were suffering from or were at risk of harm. The children were moved from Child Protection Plans to Child in Need plans. During this conference the Chair ‘acknowledged that there were some mistakes made during the process and that things could have been dealt with in a different way to assist the conclusion’. In response to our enquiries the chair advised this acknowledgement related to the earlier allegations where medical information relating to the children was not shared by Health in 2019. This meant investigations could not establish if any abuse had taken place at the time.
Duty to Provide Accommodation In the summer of 2023, Mr B’s son, L, and his girlfriend, K, resided at Mr B’s property for a three month period.
The Council were aware K was residing at Mr B’s property and allocated her a social worker. The Council completed couples work on healthy relationships with L and K. The Council also offered advice and signposting to Mr B and K’s family.
Due to K’s mother having parental responsibility, the section 20 threshold was not met and the Council had no duty to provide accommodation for K. Mr B was advised to call the police if K was refusing to leave his property.
Analysis Section 47 Investigation and Child Protection Conference In accordance with the Children Act 1989 the Council has a duty to make such enquiries as it considers necessary to decide whether to take any action to safeguard or promote a child’s welfare. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council completed the section 47 enquiries or subsequent investigation.
During the Initial Child Protection Conference the chair made a decision on the category under which the Child Protection Plans would be implemented based on the advice of the professionals present. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions during the initial child protection conference.
During the Child Protection Review the chair stated mistakes had been made in 2019. The chair has clarified this comment related to the health service failing to share important medical information which may have changed the outcome of the 2019 investigation. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions during the Child Protection Review. We cannot investigate the actions of the NHS.
In accordance with the section 20 of the Children Act 1989, K did not meet the threshold for accommodation from the Council. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
Final decision
We have found no evidence of fault causing injustice by the Council.
Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman